Hello Florin, Wednesday, April 6, 2005, 11:29:51 AM, you wrote:
FA> I'm using SA since... well, a long time ago, and one thing that i FA> noticed was a pattern in the way its efficiency varies: it's pretty good FA> soon after a new release, then it gets continuously worse; then a new FA> release and all of a sudden it's good again, then it starts "decaying" FA> again... FA> Well, it's been a while since the last release, and it's already FA> noticeably worse. I know this has been discussed before, i am aware of FA> the VirusScannerTypeUpdates FAQ entry, but you know what, from an end- FA> user's point of view, it does not matter. All that matters is that, FA> despite brilliant technical discussions, the efficiency is going down FA> and, if a new version is not released soon enough, the users start to FA> complain. This is what's happening right now. FA> I guess something has to change. "Then change it yourself" type of FA> advices will go straight to /dev/null, thank you, because as far as SA FA> is concerned, i'm just a user. I am merely pointing out the problem. That's one of the goals of SARE, to provide useful rule updates to keep SpamAssassin's performance high even late in the cycle between releases. IMO we do very well. My systems are still running 99.9% accurate at this date (processing about 50k emails a week, 50/50 ham/spam). To benefit from this work, you need to be able to judiciously apply SARE updates whenever they come out. Bob Menschel
